linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the block tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20211101160855.34eae992@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Mon, 1 Nov 2021 16:08:55 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@...gle.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the block tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c

between commit:

  0bf6d96cb829 ("block: remove blk_{get,put}_request")

from the block tree and commit:

  edc0596cc04b ("scsi: ufs: core: Stop clearing UNIT ATTENTIONS")

from the scsi tree.

I fixed it up (the latter removed some of the code modified by the former)
and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next
is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your
upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may
also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting
tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped